The 9/11 Commission Scam Exposed in all its Glory

There are 3 major components to the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory), the Bush administration (and other major official) claims, the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports (and to a lesser extent, the puppet MSM parroting of everything official without raising any significant question). The former were the highest US government authority and the latter two were the very reluctant creation of the US government. This thread exposes the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report. For reference, the technical and other details of the NIST scam can be found here:

A bit of history to begin the thread. It is noteworthy and a fact that the Bush administration did what it could to prevent any investigation of 9/11 and wanted no part of one at all (see at 3:30 and 7:55). But when backed against the wall, wanted to limit it to "intelligence failures". This briefing took place 8 months after 9/11.

It was obvious very early on that the Bush administration wanted to peddle their version of the 9/11 events and their version only and wanted to coverup as much as they could. A tremendous amount of physical evidence was carted away and destroyed as quickly as possible following 9/11.

The Commission Report is accurate. Otherwise someone could quote the text of the report and show where the authors were lying. Since they cannot we can assume the report is accurate.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately there's nothing accurate about the above statement.

1. The Commission Report is accurate: The published evidence (the 9/11 Commission Report itself) and the Commission themselves contradict this statement.
2. Someone could quote the text of the report and show where the authors were lying: No one needs to quote specific text to show where the authors are lying, they've already publicly admitted they were lied to but published the lies anyway.
3. Since they cannot we can assume the report is accurate: This is false on two levels. First "we" is fallaciously used to indicate that all of us agree it's accurate (using the poster's sole criteria) when only the poster is making a claim. Second, "we" cannot assume anything just because YOU assume, YOU speak for no one but yourself.

The evidence that this report is far from accurate comes from the history and the authors themselves. However YOU can ASSume it's accurate as you obviously do, the rest of US decide for OURselves.

I haven't had a whole bunch of time to devote to this project for personal reasons but I will get to it piece by piece in due time.

Then, Senator Max Cleland, an original 9/11 Commission member resigned. A couple of noteworthy quotes:

&#8220;This is a scam, it&#8217;s disgusting. America is being cheated.&#8221;

&#8220;As each day goes by, we learn that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists before September 11 than it has ever admitted&#8230;. Let&#8217;s chase this rabbit into the ground. They had a plan to go to war and when 9/11 happened that&#8217;s what they did; they went to war.&#8221;

There were massive conflicts of interests as Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration crony, was named Executive Director. It is noteworthy that Zelikow wrote the outline of the 9/11 Commission Report before the Commission got started and had strong control over the Commission's direction and full editorial control over the report itself.

The 9/11 Commission did NOT conduct a legitimate investigation of 9/11 by their own words and actions/non-actions. For example, the preface of the 9/11 Commission Report states:

The primary reason for Senator Max Cleland's resignation was the fact that the Bush administration deliberately stalled the "investigation" and its failure to cooperate with the 9/11 Commission. Cleland claimed "If this decision stands, I, as a member of the commission, cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised." The decision he was referring to was the White House decision to set conditions for the examination of documents. Indeed those conditions included the gross over-classification of documents:

"There is approximately 570 cubic feet of textual records. A large percentage of the Commission's records are national security classified files."

"The Commission's mandate was to provide a "full and complete accounting" of the attacks of September 11, 2001" (see above link)

However, the Commission did no such thing. There was no forensic examination of the evidence or any criminal investigation of any kind (by the Commission's own claims), therefore a "complete accounting" was impossible. The NIST investigation/investigators were NOT contributors to the 9/11 Commission Report. The Commission Report claims they interviewed over 1,200 individuals in 10 countries, however we know from key eyewitnesses that their accounts are absent from the 9/11 Commission Report. Some of these key eyewitnesses are Norman Mineta, Sibel Edmonds, William Rodriguez and most notably George Bush and Richard Cheney (the latter two by their own request).

With regard to the Bush/Cheney interviews, the 9/11 Family Steering Committee submitted 400+ questions they wanted the Commission to ask these two individuals. The following is a compilation of those questions and the rated answers (or absence of answers). The following document was compiled by Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken, two of the four Jersey Girls.

Besides the Kleinberg/Van Auken document, there are many videos, books and articles denouncing and contradicting the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report. Some of these are listed here:

9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Targets

9/11 family member and "Jersey Girl" Patty Casazza has just revealed that whistleblowers told her that -- before 9/11 -- the government knew the exact day, the type of attack, and the targets.

Casazza further stated that these whistleblowers saw how Sibel Edmonds was being harrassed and gagged, and were fearful that the same thing would happen to them. So they approached the Jersey Girls to ask them to demand the 9/11 Commission subpoena the whistleblowers. The Jersey Girls tried to bring the whistleblowers before the 9/11 Commission, and the Commissioners agreed, but then never let the whistleblowers testify, let alone subpoena them.

The 9/11 Commissioners publicly expressed anger at cover ups and obstructions of justice by the government into a real 9/11 investigation:

9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says I dont believe for a minute we got everything right, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

The 9/11 Commission chair said the Commission was set up to fail

The Commissions co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) obstructed our investigation

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didnt have access . . . .

9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: It is a national scandal; This investigation is now compromised; and One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up. When asked in 2009 if he thought there should be another 9/11 commission, Cleland responded: There should be about fifteen 9/11 commissions

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer)  who led the 9/11 staffs inquiry  said At some level of the government, at some point in time there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened. He also said I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described . The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years . This is not spin. This is not true.

No wonder the Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11  Bob Graham  and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a PERMANENT 9/11 commission or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.

I will close by pointing out that I concluded my study of what I came to call &#8220;the Kean-Zelikow Report&#8221; by writing that it, &#8220;far from lessening my suspicions about official complicity, has served to confirm them. Why would the minds in charge of this final report engage in such deception if they were not trying to cover up very high crimes?&#8221;

The title of the official publication says 9/11 Commission Report but that's a lie from the second word, and obviously, Dr. Griffin agrees. I differ with Griffin because it's really the Zelikow Report, the rest were used as pawns for the coverup. Only one had the stones to blast it and resign. The next word is a lie too.

Besides the Kleinberg/Van Auken document, there are many videos, books and articles denouncing and contradicting the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report. Some of these are listed here:

9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Targets

9/11 family member and "Jersey Girl" Patty Casazza has just revealed that whistleblowers told her that -- before 9/11 -- the government knew the exact day, the type of attack, and the targets.

Casazza further stated that these whistleblowers saw how Sibel Edmonds was being harrassed and gagged, and were fearful that the same thing would happen to them. So they approached the Jersey Girls to ask them to demand the 9/11 Commission subpoena the whistleblowers. The Jersey Girls tried to bring the whistleblowers before the 9/11 Commission, and the Commissioners agreed, but then never let the whistleblowers testify, let alone subpoena them.

The 9/11 Commission Didn&#8217;t Believe the Government &#8230; So Why Should We?

9/11 Commissioners Admit They Never Got the Full Story

The 9/11 Commissioners publicly expressed anger at cover ups and obstructions of justice by the government into a real 9/11 investigation:

9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says &#8220;I don&#8217;t believe for a minute we got everything right&#8221;, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

The 9/11 Commission chair said the Commission was &#8220;set up to fail&#8221;

The Commission&#8217;s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) &#8220;obstructed our investigation&#8221;

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that &#8220;There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn&#8217;t have access . . . .&#8221;

9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said &#8220;We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting&#8221;

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: &#8220;It is a national scandal&#8221;; &#8220;This investigation is now compromised&#8221;; and &#8220;One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up&#8221;. When asked in 2009 if he thought there should be another 9/11 commission, Cleland responded: &#8220;There should be about fifteen 9/11 commissions&#8221;

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) &#8211; who led the 9/11 staff&#8217;s inquiry &#8211; said &#8220;At some level of the government, at some point in time&#8230;there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened&#8220;. He also said &#8220;I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described &#8230;. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years&#8230;. This is not spin. This is not true.&#8221;

No wonder the Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 &#8211; Bob Graham &#8211; and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a &#8220;PERMANENT 9/11 commission&#8221; or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.

Thank you, along with the irrelevant insults I presume? Whether you "ask" or not, some quotes have already been posted, beginning with the title of the report. As already explained, I will post issues about the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report (and quotes) as I see fit, period.

Continuing with the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report expose.

It is quite significant that about 25% of the footnotes supporting the 9/11 Commission Report were indirectly taken from 3rd party accounts from detainees who were renditioned to black sites and mercilessly tortured. Some key testimony was taken from a torture victim who signed a "confession" he wasn't allowed to read. The Senate Intelligence Committee report on Torture claims torture yielded NO useful intelligence. And the CIA destroyed all the torture tapes in violation of a court order to preserve them. So there is not one account in the 9/11 Commission Report taken from torture "testimony" that's has any value whatsoever.

Detainee Interrogation Reports
Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al Qaeda members. A number of these "detainees" have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot.
Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses-sworn enemies of the United States-is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communations received from the locations where the actual intelligence take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting.

9/11 Commission Report - page 146 (PDF page 163)

What the 9/11 Commission DISCLAIMER is saying (in conjunction with the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on torture claim that torture yielded NO useful intelligence) is that Chapters 5 and 7 in their report (that mostly deal with Al Qaeda) is so unreliable as to be absolutely worthless. Yet the statement includes the following sentence:

We have nonetheless decided to include information from captured 9/11 conspirators and al Qaeda members in our report.

Note that what the 9/11 Commission DISCLAIMER is also saying is that they deliberately included at least 2 chapters of worthless information in their report. There is also no proof of any kind that some or any of these detainees were actually Al Qaeda members or had anything to do with Al Qaeda or 9/11. In fact as I recall, at least one of these detainees whose 3rd party account was obtained via torture was eventually released because he had no ties to Al Qaeda. The last sentence is to the best of my recollection, I will try to find the documents where I read this at another time.

There's more to come but at this juncture, my sincerest thanks to all rabid OCT defenders to have prodded me to do what I should have been doing. You asked for it and I'm giving it. You certainly deserve it.

I understand the information I posted is overwhelming but it's a very worthwhile read IMO, no matter what your beliefs are. Almost all the evidence referenced are US government sources, especially its official publications.

Thanks for that orderly analysis Bob, it's there for anybody to see, as long as one is curious and honest.

The Kean-Zelikow Commission (I love that name) is just like the Warren Commission--the bureaucracy's way of protecting the guilty and covering asses at all levels.

It's all there for anyone to see--the government is making stuff up, telling a story that is contradicted by physics.

Click to expand...

The official publications authored by the 9/11 Commission and NIST, both masquerading as investigations, have been demonstrably proven to be designed as coverups. A coverup almost always serves only one purpose, to protect the real criminals. For elements within the US government to be involved in these tactics is treasonous conspiracy.

The Preface of the 9/11 Commission Report says:

We thank officials, past and present, who were generous with their time and provided us with insight. The PENTTBOM team at the FBI .... etc. - page xvii (PDF page 14)

However we were recently informed that the FBI withheld over 80,000 pages of documents from their PENTTBOM investigation from the 9/11 Commission and Congress and lied when they claimed they gave them everything.

The FBI never published any official report from their PENTTBOM "investigation" (another entity involved in the 9/11 coverup) because they classified as much as they could, even from the 9/11 Commission and Congress.

No *giggle* The powers that be here see fit to keep persons making allegations from being aggressively questioned.

So there is no point to asking you to quote the report and the corresponding lie; Make all of the baseless allegations you wish. All the proof needed is that there has been nearly 17 years between the event and now and youve gained not one inch in your crusade to do anything except make people pity you more.

That's about the only thing you got right, you have no point. Your idea of "aggressive questioning" is to insult those who disagree with you. That isn't the purpose of this forum nor has it anything to do with this thread. Anytime you want to discuss the subject of this thread in a civilized manner, you're certainly welcome to do so, otherwise what you usually do generally amounts to trolling.

The information I posted has nothing to do with me other than that I'm strongly inclined to post such information. It's up to the reader to do as he/she wishes with such information. Hopefully, some will learn what they haven't learned before, that's my primary objective. If that's what YOU believe YOU want to "pity" me for, it's of no concern to me, it's totally irrelevant as are most of your posts.

Again, you've made it clear you can't quote the commission report and show any meaningful lie it tried to pass over. Yet you claim the commission did just that. And it's apparently against the rules for me to continually point Out your manmouth failure.

Anytime you want to discuss the subject of this thread in a civilized manner, you're certainly welcome to do so, otherwise what you usually do generally amounts to trolling.

Click to expand...

And you insist on discussing your demands and me. Once again, please stick to the topic (discuss the issues I've posted or add your own relevant to this thread) and stop trolling.

Again, there is no need to quote any specific text to expose the entire 9/11 Commission Report as a lie (as already clearly shown). I never made the claim that I need to quote any specific text to show it's a lie, it was you who demanded I do. However, some text has already been quoted and one specific disclaimer I quoted eliminates 2 entire chapters as wholly unreliable and worthless. But more importantly, quotes from those who were directly involved in the creation of (or surrounding) the 9/11 Commission Report are an unmistakable admission the report is a lie. The burden of proof always rests with the claimant(s) (the 9/11 Commission in this case) and much of what's in the report is unsupported by evidence or contradicted by evidence, science and/or logic.

So back to the discussion at hand. This website cites many specifics taken from the 9/11 Commission Report that are contradicted by those factors (see "E. Consensus Points about the 9/11 Flights" for example):